How to Read an Academic Research Paper

Lecture 14: How to Read an Academic Research Paper

Bogdan G. Popescu
bgpopescu@tec.mx

Tecnológico de Monterrey

Today’s Goal

  • Learn a practical strategy for reading academic papers
  • Feel less intimidated by dense academic writing
  • Extract key ideas efficiently (without reading every word)

Why Papers Feel Intimidating

It’s Not Just You

Designed for experts:

  • Dense jargon
  • Statistical tables
  • Long and technical

Good news:

  • Confusion is normal
  • Even professors struggle first time
  • You need ideas, not every detail

A Secret About Academic Writing

  • Most papers could be explained more simply
  • Authors write for other scholars, not students
  • Your job: Extract key ideas, not memorize everything
  • Reading skill is rarely taught—but can be learned

Our Running Example

“Waking Up the Golden Dawn”

Full title: “Waking Up the Golden Dawn: Does Exposure to the Refugee Crisis Increase Support for Extreme-Right Parties?”

Published: Political Analysis (2019)
Authors: Dinas, Matakos, Xefteris, and Hangartner

What’s This Paper About?

  • Question: When refugees arrived on Greek islands (2015), did locals vote more for extreme-right Golden Dawn?
  • Why it matters: Does direct exposure to refugees change political attitudes?
  • Natural experiment: Islands received different numbers of refugees

The Three-Pass Strategy

Don’t Read Start to Finish!

Bad strategy: Open page 1, read every word until the end

Good strategy: Make multiple passes, each with a different goal

Based on research: “Three-pass approach” (Keshav, 2007)

The Three Passes

  • Pass 1 (15-20 min): Understand the main argument
  • Pass 2 (15-20 min): Understand the evidence
  • Pass 3 (optional): Deep dive into methods

Total: 30-40 minutes for core understanding

Pass 1: The Big Picture

What to Read

  1. Title and abstract (2 min)
  2. Introduction (10 min)
  3. Conclusion (5 min)

Skip everything else for now!

The Title Tells You

“Waking Up the Golden Dawn: Does Exposure to the Refugee Crisis Increase Support for Extreme-Right Parties?”

  • Topic: Refugee crisis and far-right voting
  • Question: Does exposure increase support?
  • Setting: Greece, Golden Dawn party

Read the Abstract Like a Trailer

  • The question: What are they asking?
  • The answer: What did they find?
  • The method: How did they study it?
  • So what: Why it matters?

Golden Dawn Abstract: Key Points

  • Question: Does refugee exposure increase far-right support?
  • Answer: ~2 percentage point increase (44% at the mean)
  • Method: Natural experiment comparing Greek islands
  • So what: Mere exposure can fuel anti-immigrant politics

The Introduction

  • Why this matters: Major refugee crisis, rise of European far-right
  • Previous research: Mixed evidence on contact theory
  • What’s new: Uses sudden 2015 arrivals as natural experiment
  • Main argument: Exposure increased support, especially where refugees were visible

The Conclusion

  • Key result: ~2 point increase in Golden Dawn vote share
  • Mechanism: Effect strongest with refugee visibility (not closed camps)
  • Limitation: Can’t determine if effect is permanent

Honesty about limitations = good research

After Pass 1: Pause and Reflect

Write Down

  1. The main question in your own words
  2. The main answer in your own words
  3. One thing you’re confused about

This becomes your foundation for Pass 2

Pass 2: The Evidence

What to Read

  1. All figures and tables (10 min)
  2. Research design section (10 min)

Goal: Understand HOW they answered the question

How to Read Figures

You don’t need to understand the statistics!

  • What is being compared?
  • What pattern do they show?
  • Does this support the main argument?

Figures tell stories—look for visual patterns first

Golden Dawn: Key Figure

  • Effect of refugee arrivals on vote share over time
  • Positive numbers = increased Golden Dawn support
  • Effect appears after 2015 (when refugees arrived)

Pattern matters more than exact numbers

Reading Tables Without Panic

  • Rows: Different groups or time periods
  • Columns: Different measurement approaches
  • Numbers: Estimated effects
  • **Stars (*):** Statistically significant (not random chance)

Focus on: Direction (positive/negative) and consistency

Golden Dawn: Results Table

  • Positive numbers throughout (exposure → more votes)
  • Larger effects where refugees were visible
  • Consistent across different specifications

Translation: Finding is robust—holds up multiple ways

Understanding the Research Design

Core comparison:

  • Islands with many refugees vs. few/none
  • Were islands similar before refugees arrived?
  • Can we rule out alternative explanations?

Identifying the Question

Every Paper Has a Core Question

Template: Does [X] cause [Y]?

Golden Dawn: Does [refugee exposure] cause [increased far-right voting]?

Why Questions Matter

  • Helps evaluate if answer makes sense
  • Reveals alternative explanations
  • Connects to other readings
  • Generates your own questions

Understanding Causality

What Does “Causal” Mean?

Causal claim: X causes Y (not just correlation)

Challenge: How do we know it’s not something else?

The Golden Dawn Comparison

  • Treatment: Islands receiving many refugees
  • Control: Islands receiving few/none
  • Comparison: Did support increase MORE in treatment islands?
  • Assumption: Islands were similar before (tested with placebo tests)

Think of It Like an Experiment

Testing fertilizer on plants:

  • Treatment group: Gets fertilizer
  • Control group: Doesn’t get fertilizer
  • Compare: Do treated plants grow more?

Golden Dawn does this with islands (“natural experiment”)

Pass 3: Methods (Optional)

When to Do Pass 3

Do it if:

  • Writing about the paper in detail
  • Preparing for in-depth discussion
  • Planning similar research

Skip if: Just need main ideas for class

What to Expect

  • The methods/analysis section in detail
  • This is the hardest part
  • Can take 1-4 hours depending on complexity

Strategy: Go slow, look up terms, ask for help

Reading Critically

Good Reading = Critical Reading

Don’t just accept everything!

  • Is the comparison fair?
  • Are there alternative explanations?
  • Does evidence support the conclusion?
  • What are the limitations?

Critical Questions for Golden Dawn

  • Could tourism have decreased in exposed islands?
  • Might media coverage have differed?
  • Would the effect persist over time?
  • Could economic factors explain results?

Authors address some—but not all

Every Study Has Limits

  • Good papers acknowledge them
  • No single study proves anything definitively
  • Science advances through accumulation

Your job: Understand what the paper CAN and CAN’T tell us

Using AI Responsibly

AI Can Help—But Has Limits

AI CAN:

  • Explain jargon
  • Clarify confusing sentences
  • Define concepts

AI CANNOT:

  • Replace reading
  • Evaluate critically for you
  • Guarantee accuracy

Ethical Principles

  • AI is a reading assistant, not a replacement
  • Always verify AI information
  • Never copy-paste AI output directly
  • Check your institution’s policies

Good AI Prompts

Explain specific terms: “What does ‘difference-in-differences’ mean in simple terms?”

Clarify confusing sentences: “Rephrase this sentence: [paste sentence]”

Check understanding: “Did I understand this correctly? [explain in your words]”

Bad AI Prompts

Asking AI to replace reading: “Summarize this entire 30-page paper”

Using without verification: “Give me references on this topic” (AI invents citations!)

Copying directly: “Write a paragraph critiquing this paper’s methods”

Warning: AI Hallucinations

AI can invent:

  • Citations that don’t exist
  • Misrepresentations of what papers say
  • Plausible-sounding but incorrect information

Always verify before trusting

Practical Tips

Create a Reading Template

For each paper:

  1. Research question (1 sentence)
  2. Main finding (1 sentence)
  3. Method used (1 sentence)
  4. One strength, one limitation (1 sentence each)
  5. Why it matters (1 sentence)

You Don’t Need to Understand

Don’t worry about:

  • Every equation or statistical test
  • Every citation
  • Every technical detail

You DO Need to Understand

Focus on:

  • Main question and answer
  • Basic logic of the comparison
  • Key evidence
  • Major limitations

Reading Gets Easier

  • First paper: 3+ hours, still confused
  • Tenth paper: 1-2 hours, much clearer
  • Twentieth paper: 45-60 minutes, confident

Why? Jargon becomes familiar, you recognize patterns

The Strategy: Review

Three-Pass Summary

  • Pass 1 (15-20 min): Title, abstract, intro, conclusion → Main argument
  • Pass 2 (15-20 min): Figures, tables, design → Evidence
  • Pass 3 (optional): Methods → Deep understanding

Total: 30-40 minutes for core contribution

Why This Works

  • Build understanding gradually
  • Stay oriented—always know what you’re looking for
  • Efficient—don’t waste time on details before grasping whole

Key Takeaways

Remember

  1. Confusion is normal—even for experts
  2. Don’t read linearly—use multi-pass strategy
  3. Focus on the question—it’s your compass
  4. Figures tell stories—you don’t need advanced stats
  5. Read critically—ask questions, identify limits
  6. Use AI wisely—as assistant, not replacement

Remember: Reading is a skill. You improve with practice.